So what's really the problem with S&W's AR Sporter?

[MIL-DOT]

Nearly all on-line and You-tube reviews I've seen have been very positive, but I've read lots of guys on a few different forums ranting about how they value the lives of themselves and their family too much to trust to a $600 AR.
From everything I've gathered and experienced, S&W is a very reputable company, that largely produces a solid product, and firmly stands behind them.
The only "cut corners" I'm aware of are the lack of a forward assist and dust cover, but countless solid,proven firearms have neither of these.
I know the newer ones no longer have the nicer 5R barrel rifling, but the standard chrome-lined barrel isn't exactly junk, it's just not as premium.
As best I can tell, these rifles are assmebled properly, by professionals, from quality parts, and are not only sufficient for recreational plinking, but for home defense or even for the infamous post-SHTF scenarios.
So what is the real deal on these things, are there any reasons these are genuinely sub-par, or is it just the arm-chair commandos that aren't happy with anything that isn't the absolute very-best-of-the-very-best and costs an arm and a leg?

 

[socalbeachbum]

I have the M&P15OR model, it is quite accurate and I've been all through it, and it is quality throughout. I may have lucked out but my barrel is as accurate as my 16" medium-heavy SS Lothar Walther match grade barrel.

I have looked over the sport model and it looks very good, just minus the features you mentioned. But I don't know the quality of the Sport barrel. Quantico Tactical has these on sale all the time now.

 

[ford8nr]

I own one, never had a hiccup with it and WOULD trust my life to it. There are always the Colt or nothing camp even though Colt has after markets build at least one pistol they stamp their name on. Some people claim only a scope over $800 is a "decent" one, I have many $300 that are just fine. Variety, that's what makes the world go round. My bet is most haters never owned OR fired one.

 

[B.W.]

I've had mine for about two years now. I haven't shot it a ton but I bet I have 3000 rounds through it. Never a single hiccup of any kind. I've used quite a few different factory rounds but mostly handloads. Its a great gun, especially in that price range.

 

[rule303]

There is nothing wrong with the M&P Sport. It is a basic, no frills AR that will perform well enough for the vast majority of shooters. The forward assist and dust cover does nothing to increase reliability except in the most extreme circumstances. It isn't a specialty gun, but it isn't priced like one either.

 

[Davek1977]

If people want to pay 2-3x the price for a rifle that, for most practical purposes, offers no distinct advantage or the "bargin" model, who am I to stop them (as long as its not going on MY CC LOL). It reminds me of people who insist on paying $6 for a box of Benedryl, when theres a generic equivalent in the shelf RIGHT next to it for $2. Both will clear up your allergies, but one cost you 3x more for the exact same result.

 

[Theohazard]

I know the newer ones no longer have the nicer 5R barrel rifling, but the standard chrome-lined barrel isn't exactly junk, it's just not as premium.

I know they used to come with 5R rifled 1:8 barrels and now they come with standard 6-groove rifled 1:9 barrels, but I thought they've always come with a Melanite (nitride) barrel instead of chrome lining. As far as I know, no M&P-15 or M&P-10 rifles come with chromed-lined barrels, but someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[MIL-DOT]

I know they used to come with 5R rifled 1:8 barrels and now they come with standard 6-groove rifled 1:9 barrels, but I thought they've always come with a Melanite (nitride) barrel instead of chrome lining. As far as I know, no M&P-15 or M&P-10 rifles come with chromed-lined barrels, but someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

A couple months ago, I e-mailed a couple questions about the barrels/bores to S&W customer service and heard back a few days later. She told me that if I'd send her the serial number, she could tell me if I had a melonited bore, or a newer chromed one.
Of course, even Glock's CS reps have been known to give different answers to the same question, so who knows.

 

[W.E.G.]

There is nothing wrong with the Smith and Wesson rifle.

Nothing at all.

What you see is what you get, and it works.

If you want something else (insert list of other configurations or fancy components and accessories here), you can add them yourself, or buy a different rifle.

Its just not hard - or expensive - to build a functional AR these days.

 

[socalbeachbum]

I would certainly buy a S&W Sport before I'd buy some unknown brand that's been assembled in a garage. And I'd definitely buy a Sport model rather than assemble one myself. I've assembled a few AR's now and you run into fitment issues. Manufacturers like S&W have tight incoming QA procedures that make sure components are to spec and fit and work together.

 

[strambo]

Why fall into (and perpetuate) the all-or-nothing cheap vs. "armchair commando expensive" sillyness?

Of course, the truth is neither. The S&W Sport is a basic no-frills AR. It is what it is and will serve most people just fine. That doesn't mean there aren't objectively quantifiable differences between it and a better AR, there are, and I'm not talking about a $2500 Noveske, I'm talking about a $850 Colt 6920.

The Colt, for example, will use better materials and be assembled to a better standard and have HPT/MP testing on the bolt and barrel to ensure there are no flaws and have everything properly staked etc. Does this mean the S&W will fall apart? Heck, no. It should do just fine for many users. HD isn't a high-demand environment anyway, it just lays around in a climate controlled home until asked to shoot 1-5 rds at an intruder.

Now, you wouldn't want to pick an M&P Sport to attend a bunch of multi-thousand round carbine courses or shoot 3 gun with. Those higher volume (and high heat) firing schedules will take their toll and that is where the differences will show up. 99% of users don't need that.

The boutique guns at/above $2k are really nice, but aren't better than the Colt from a reliability standpoint, they just have nicer furniture, trigger, barrel, other features etc.

...and before anyone accuses me of being a Colt fanboy (there is the sillyness again), I don't own a Colt. I use it as an example as the Colt 6920 is as close to a military M4 as it gets and is a good baseline yardstick for an AR.

What makes AR's different from other rifles is most other rifles are singular models, not different copies of the same thing. So, we have a gazillion people making ARs in all different ways resulting in much confusion and brand wars on forums. There is only one Remington 700, one Mini-14...

 

[MIL-DOT]

I don't doubt that the higher-end AR's are genuinely "better" in some discernable ways (I've owned 2 Colts), but my question was are there any areas that the M&P Sport is of tangibly sub-par quality,especially as it applies to realistic,domestic applications (which I mean to include hypothetically helping defend home and neighborhood during a major societal/governmental breakdown).
While it admitedly wouldn't be my first choice to convert to full-auto and then parachute into Syria with it, but I'm assuming and hoping it's far beyond sufficient quality to withstand a mere 5-round firefight with a home intruder.
I just wanted to know if these rifles were more on-par with an Olympic Arms that "has shot pretty reliably.......so far", or if it's genuinely solid,reliable gear, minus a couple non-critical bells and whistles. It seems to be the latter.

 

[Walkalong]

but my question was are there any areas that the M&P Sport is of tangibly sub-par quality,especially as it applies to realistic,domestic applications

None IMHO.

 

[strambo]

I'd rate it above an Oly for sure...I think your assessment is correct, it should provide many years of regular use and is priced reasonably for what it is.

 

[henschman]

The main things I don't like about it are the twist rate and the barrel profile. It is a heavy profile barrel with 1/9 rifling. It seems like an odd combination of features. A heavy barrel definitely has it's place -- mainly in the roles of target shooting and long range precision -- but for those roles I would definitely want a faster twist, so I could shoot the longer, heavier match bullets like 69 and 77 grain. 1/9 is a great twist rate for shooting cheap surplus ammo, and works well with a lot of good low barrier penetration defensive loads, but a heavy barreled rifle is not what I would want for a defensive/2A purpose carbine. The Sport is front-heavy and handles poorly with that barrel. I would greatly prefer a pencil or even a gov't profile barrel on a defensive carbine. I also don't like the lack of a dust cover. I wouldn't really care about this on a rifle that only ever leaves the house to go to the gun range though, which I realize would be the case for a lot of shooters.

I have not had good experiences with S&W customer service either, but that isn't much of an issue on an AR, platform, since spare parts are cheap, plentiful, and available from many sources besides the manufacturer.

 

[JayPee]

MIL-DOT, if you ever get into a fire fight so intense and prolonged that any discernible difference in performance or reliability between your $600 Smith and Wesson and my $1,200 LMT becomes apparent, then you're in a deeper hole than any AR-15 could ever get you out of, IMO.

A few years ago some sloppy AR manufacturers turned out some crappy AR's that were advertised as being MilSpec, but which weren't. When they got caught at it by the AR community, it unfortunately led to a culture in which the "high dollar AR or nothing" school of thought reigned supreme. The garbage being purveyed was that anything less than a Colt was obviously an inferior gun, and the higher the price, the more reliable the gun.

The heat that came down on these cheapo companies from AR shooters got them religion, and now it is pretty difficult to find an AR that won't defend your home capably. But all of that posturing on behalf of the high-dollar guns is taking a long time to die, and the really sad part is that it is leading good guys like yourself to ask the question you're asking.

I agree with all the other guys in this thread who think your Smith and Wesson is a good gun that will serve you well.

JayPee

 

[captmoto]

I don't get it. All this fuss about a great gun being too inexpensive. Do you guys jump into $80,000 pick-ups or Hummers or Mercedes or big Beemers to go to the range? Hand made shoes, custom clothes?
Hentschman is the only one to give a quantitative answer. Thank you Hentschman.
Mildot, I have one and 2 home made guns. All function identically well. Use good mags and keep it lubed and it will serve your purposes well.

 

[Inebriated]

They get good reviews because they're good rifles, with good features for rifles within their price range.

Very few QC-related problems, very few function problems.

Smith & Wesson saves money in a couple areas:
- Machine time on the upper and lower costs them less with no DC/FA and an integral trigger guard.
- The bolts are all individually MP inspected, but batch HP tested. Never been able to find actual info on what bolt steel they use.
- The barrel is a low-cost barrel. 4140 steel, nitrided finish inside and out, and no excessive contour work. It's likely what saves them the most money.
- The handguards have no heat shields, and I'm sure it costs them pennies

The rest of their parts likely save them through the fact that they already are a big company producing in volume... FSB's, Magpul rear sights, LPK's, receiver extensions, bolts, bolt carriers, stocks, etc. all goes on the rest of their rifles. And the rest of the assembly process is the same across all their rifles.

So yes, you lose out on a chrome-lined CHF barrel that has a pencil profile or a government profile, both of which likely cost more in machine time for profiling anyway, you lose that extra level of assuredness that comes with having each bolt individually HP tested, and you have no DC/FA and cheap handguards. You also likely get a 6061 receiver extension, rather than a 7075. They don't say, which is why I assume it's 6061... But the rifle is assembled well, it's proven to work, and where you aren't getting a premium barrel or bolt, you are getting a very low-priced acceptable barrel and bolt. For most people, it's fine.

I paid $560 for the Sport. I have 1200 trouble-free rounds through it, and I trust it, and whole-heartedly recommend it to people who want an AR and are trying to keep costs down. Personally, I bought it as a learning tool, and it's more than satisfied that role. It's just important for you to know how a rifle is built, what each part means to you, and weigh whether or not the difference in cost is worth it.

 

[captmoto]

Great post inebriated. The worst thing about the S&W to me is it tripped my trigger to dig into building a couple more. I'm pretty sure mine has heat shields in the handguard though.

 

[chris in va]

My 1:8" Sport was $630 four years ago. After 3-4000 rounds, I can firmly attest this rifle is worth much more than that.

It's too bad I really can't warm up to the AR platform, because this thing is a real gem. I haven't felt the need to 'tactical' it out, just a curved buttpad, $5 Colt shielded handguard and fatter grip I found for $2.

 

[Jackal]

Sad thing is, most folks read that 1:7 twist is mil spec and THE thing to have, when they primarily shoot 55gr fmj ammo.... A 1:8 or 1:9 will actually be better with the vast majority of ammo people actually use.

 

[DNS]

I'd chalk it up to youngsters playing internet commandos. I've watched them put down KaBars because real men carry Beckers. Apples and oranges. Don't care but then again my machismo isn't on the line, and because i think they're retards.

My SW is the 1:8 twist. Absolute laser beam with American Eagle 55 grain.

 

[Jackal]

I've watched them put down KaBars because real men carry Beckers.

We all know that both wilt in the shadow of Esee...

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

"So what's really the problem with S&W's AR Sporter?"

Short answer? Not a thing.

 

[strambo]

Why is barrel twist being equated to "machismo" now? Most people buy 1/7 twist because that is what most makers make...I doubt ego is involved in the vast majority of cases.

I wonder if other hobbies are like this; "Most knitters use 13" needles due to their excess feminism when a 12" needle will still knit with the best of them and work better on lighter pile yarn."